HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)

No. 2/2023

In

S.B. Criminal Appeal No.05/2023

Ramnaresh S/o Ramesh Chand, R/o Koyla Police Station Badi

District Dholpur (Raj) (The Accused Appellant Is Confined In

District Jail Dholpur)

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Sumit Kumar Jain

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

06/07/2023

Instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred in

pending appeal which was admitted for hearing on 29.03.2023

filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated

15.12.2022 in sessions case no. 20/2018 passed by learned

Special Judge (POCSO Act cases and Commission for Protection of

Child Right Act), Dholpur whereby the present appellant was

convicted under Sections 376, 363, 366 of Indian Penal Code (for

short ‘IPC’) & Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act (for short ‘POCSO’) and further sentenced in the

following manner-

(2 of 4)

[SOSA-2/2023]

1. Under Section 6, POCSO Act- 20 years rigorous imprisonment

and a fine of ₹50,000/- and to undergo 6 months simple

imprisonment in default of payment of fine.

2. Under Section 363 IPC- 5 years of rigorous imprisonment and a

fine of ₹10,000/- and to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment in

default of payment of fine.

3. Under Section 366 IPC – 5 years of rigorous imprisonment and

a fine of ₹10,000/- and to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment

in default of payment of fine.

Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the appellant is

false implicated in the present case. He further submitted while

referring the call details that trial court has failed to appreciate the

evidence that the call details were not exhibited by the

prosecution which thereby cannot be read against the appellant.

He further submitted that the present case rests on circumstantial

evidence and the chain of events had not been completely

established by the prosecution and therefore, the appellant is

entitled to benefit of doubt. He further submitted that except

present appellant, all other persons/accused who faced trial were

acquitted by the trial court but only on the basis of one or two

circumstances, present appellant was convicted though these

circumstances were not enough to conclude that appellant was

involved in committing rape and murder of deceased. He further

referred the discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution that so-

called eye-witnesses had not supported the case of prosecution

and mobile which was seized by PW-33 (IO) was not examined

and no record was obtained from service provider. At last, he

(3 of 4)

[SOSA-2/2023]

submitted that appellant was falsely implicated and disposal of

appeal will take its own time, so the appellant be released on bail.

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public

Prosecutor.

Heard learned counsel for appellants and learned Public

Prosecutor and perused the record.

The facts giving rise to the present application for suspension

of sentence are that on 25.08.2014, a written report was lodged

by Mohar Singh, father of the victim at Police Station Badi, District

Dholpur against an unknown person alleging that on the morning

of 25.08.2014, his daughter was nowhere to be found. Later he

was informed that a dead body was recovered near Electricity

House, Sarmathura Road which happened to be that of his

daughter. On the basis of aforesaid written report, an FIR was

lodged and investigation was conducted. Learned trial court

framed charges under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 4

and 6 of POCSO Act against the appellant and convicted in the

aforesaid manner.

A perusal of record clearly indicated that a mobile was

recovered near dead body of deceased as the dead body which